Politics 2020 Field - DNC

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Users who are viewing this thread

In my opinion, replacing one racist in office with another racist isn't better. Bloomberg's stop and frisk was an act of cruelty towards minorities. He may have inherited it, but under Bloomberg it's use went up 7 fold.

Wait, just because Bloomberg made that error in judgment does not by default, make him, "a racist".

And just how do we know exactly who is and who isn't a racist?...we don't. There are many people who go out of their way to loudly proclaim that they're not racist, and they may not intend to be, but in fact deep down inside they very likely have some racial tendencies/ideas.


And does anyone really believe that Bloomberg is somehow on the same level as Trump?...really?
 
Wait, just because Bloomberg made that error in judgment does not by default, make him, "a racist".

Bloomberg's own words make him a racist. Have you not listened to the audio?

Bloomberg only changed his position because he knew stop and frisk would be problematic on a presidential run since it was such a "controversial" policy.
 
Bloomberg's own words make him a racist. Have you not listened to the audio?

Bloomberg only changed his position because he knew stop and frisk would be problematic on a presidential run since it was such a "controversial" policy.

Yes, I did hear the audio...and again, a bad decision does not make him a racist...nor does that sound bite. Trump is even trying to use it as a weapon vs Bloomberg...that in itself should tell us something.

And if Bloomberg is such a racist, why did Obama align himself with Bloomberg...and no, money is not the answer. Would Obama really do that if he truly felt that Bloomberg's actions were racist and done with actual intent and malice?

Sometimes people hear things or say things that supports their personal opinion/narrative and they run with it without looking deeper with an open mind.

And I'll ask again, does Bloomberg's mistake put him on the same level as Trump?
 
Last edited:
Yes, I did hear the audio...and again, a bad decision does not make him a racist...nor does that sound bite.

Sorry, now you are just defending Bloomberg's racism.

Edit: I have a very open mind. I don't hate Trump, Bloomberg, or any of them. I do see their corruption, racism, etc. . I see it in both the republican and democrat parties (The way it should be no matter what party you support, of which I support neither.).
 
Last edited:
Sorry, now you are just defending Bloomberg's racism.

Edit: I have a very open mind. I don't hate Trump, Bloomberg, or any of them. I do see their corruption, racism, etc. . I see it in both the republican and democrat parties (The way it should be no matter what party you support, of which I support neither.).

Why, just because I don't see things the way you do?...I could use the same logic towards you...but I won't, because I know it is flawed.
 
Why, just because I don't see things the way you do?...I could use the same logic towards you...but I won't, because I know it is flawed.

Racism isn't by opinion.

It wasn't by accident that stop and frisk went up 7 fold under his direction. Michael Bloomberg hates minorities.
 
Homelessness is such a complex issue, mental illness, and drug use being the main culprit. It’s hard to help a lot of these people when they really don’t want to be helped. It’s really sad, it needs to be tackled in a bipartisan way, because we need ALL ideas on the table.

No, economics is the main culprit
 
Racism isn't by opinion.

It wasn't by accident that stop and frisk went up 7 fold under his direction. Michael Bloomberg hates minorities.

Actually, in this case racism is by opinion...and as I said earlier, opinions vary.

So you are flat out saying that Bloomberg acted with malice towards minorities?...this is a relevant question.

...are you aware of who was committing the large majority of violent crimes in NY at the time?....do you know what the results were?

And have you ever personally done or said or even thought of anything that could in any way be remotely construed as "racist".
 
Last edited:
It’s kinda hard to get and keep a job if youre addicted to drugs and/or have a debilitating mental illness.

Not everyone who is homeless has an addiction or mental illness. I was once homeless and I had neither.
 
So you are flat out saying that Bloomberg acted with malice towards minorities?

Bloomberg's own words along with his ramping up of stop and frisk under his administration shows his racism. It's not rocket science.

Enough beating this dead horse. :deadhorse:

And have you ever personally done or said or even thought of anything that could in any way be remotely construed as "racist".

And have you ever personally done or said or even thought of anything with sheep that could in any way be remotely construed as "creepy"? :bgrin:

Seriously though, it would be illogical to go down this road with anyone.

On a side note: I am Aspergian as f*ck. I have an odd sense of humor, as you can see. My bluntness comes off as hatred and many other things to other people online. But that is not the case. I am just misconstrued is all.

Take it easy.
 
Not everyone who is homeless has an addiction or mental illness. I was once homeless and I had neither.

First, sorry to read life came at you so hard. But a huge congratulations for turning it around. It must take a Dame Lillard level of drive and fight to get through what you had to deal with, and make it out.

Do you feel comfortable answering a personal question? I place a higher value on first hand experience than news reports.

What % of homeless do you believe has an addiction and/or mental illness?
 
Bloomberg's own words along with his ramping up of stop and frisk under his administration shows his racism. It's not rocket science.

Enough beating this dead horse. :deadhorse:



And have you ever personally done or said or even thought of anything with sheep that could in any way be remotely construed as "creepy"? :bgrin:

Seriously though, it would be illogical to go down this road with anyone.

On a side note: I am Aspergian as f*ck. I have an odd sense of humor, as you can see. My bluntness comes off as hatred and many other things to other people online. But that is not the case. I am just misconstrued is all.

Take it easy.

Well, I've asked you legit questions but you've decided to hunk and peck...I'll ask for the 3rd time, do you think Bloomberg's policies were enforced with actual malice and forethought?

Just because Bloomberg or anyone else did something that may be perceived as a detriment to a certain group of people does not mean it was intentionally racist...and again for the 3rd time, the majority of the offenders in violent crimes were in fact minorities...and like it or not, his policies did have a dramatic effect in reduction of the crime rate.

And this is not a "dead horse"...the horse/subject is quite alive and likely will be for awhile. And the racist question I posed to you also had the desired effect and I'm not surprised you would not answer...by not answering you gave me the answer I was looking for and helped with proving my point.



Sorry, but no, Bloomberg does not "hate minorities" as you claimed.
 
Last edited:
do you think Bloomberg's policies were enforced with actual malice and forethought?

The answer shouldn't be so difficult to see from my posts. It's pretty obvious that Bloomberg knew he was racially targeting minorities.

https://www.npr.org/2020/02/11/8047...sk-them-bloomberg-s-2015-race-talk-stirs-deba

A federal court in New York in 2013 found that stop and frisk systemically violated the civil rights of tens of thousands of mostly black and Hispanic men in New York. The judge called the practice "indirect racial profiling" of young men of color.

Annual Stop-and-Frisk Numbers:
An analysis by the NYCLU revealed that innocent New Yorkers have been subjected to police stops and street interrogations more than 5 million times since 2002, and that Black and Latinx communities continue to be the overwhelming target of these tactics. At the height of stop-and-frisk in 2011 under the Bloomberg administration, over 685,000 people were stopped. Nearly nine out of 10 stopped-and-frisked New Yorkers have been completely innocent.

https://www.nyclu.org/en/stop-and-frisk-data

And the racist question I posed to you also had the desired effect and I'm not surprised you would not answer...by not answering you gave me the answer I was looking for and helped with my point.

I made the joke about your post in order to show you how silly of a question it was.

By using your very own logic... should I now infer that you have given me the answer to my question by not answering it? o_O
 
The answer shouldn't be so difficult to see from my posts. It's pretty obvious that Bloomberg knew he was racially targeting minorities.

https://www.npr.org/2020/02/11/8047...sk-them-bloomberg-s-2015-race-talk-stirs-deba

A federal court in New York in 2013 found that stop and frisk systemically violated the civil rights of tens of thousands of mostly black and Hispanic men in New York. The judge called the practice "indirect racial profiling" of young men of color.

Annual Stop-and-Frisk Numbers:
An analysis by the NYCLU revealed that innocent New Yorkers have been subjected to police stops and street interrogations more than 5 million times since 2002, and that Black and Latinx communities continue to be the overwhelming target of these tactics. At the height of stop-and-frisk in 2011 under the Bloomberg administration, over 685,000 people were stopped. Nearly nine out of 10 stopped-and-frisked New Yorkers have been completely innocent.

https://www.nyclu.org/en/stop-and-frisk-data



I made the joke about your post in order to show you how silly of a question it was.

By using your very own logic... should I now infer that you have given me the answer to my question by not answering it? o_O

lol...why won't you answer the question?...it wasn't silly, it was a legit question, so why not answer it...you and I both know why. Because if you say "no", you are likely not telling the truth and if you say "yes", it likely means you are being hypocritical. And you also completely skipped the "malice" part.

If you are mayor of NY and you are committed to reducing the violent crime rate, you logically should concentrate your efforts where the largest problem is, which is exactly what Bloomberg did by canvassing the problem areas and those problem areas were where mostly minorities resided. Police officers cruising known problem areas are much more likely to encounter minorities, no?...pretty simple concept.

You also continue to refuse to acknowledge that Bloomberg's policy did exactly what it was designed to do which was to reduce the violent crime rate in NYC. I guess you'll also dodge that point?

If you prefer another candidate instead of Bloomberg, fine...but you are really stretching things by claiming that "Bloomberg hates minorities"...and that's what's really "silly".
 
Last edited:
lol...why won't you answer the question?...it wasn't silly, it was a legit question, so why not answer it...you and I both know why. Because if you say "no", you are likely not telling the truth and if you say "yes", it likely mens you are being hypocritical.

And there is why I didn't answer your question. I already knew where you were going with it.

There is no reason to imply that I am a hater, a racist myself, or anything else just because you don't agree with me.
 
And there is why I didn't answer your question. I already knew where you were going with it.

There is no reason to imply that I am a hater, a racist myself, or anything else just because you don't agree with me.

Thanx...without realizing it, you proved my point. And you still refuse to acknowledge that his policies accomplished exactly what they were designed to do, and without malice.

What I don't agree with is your assertion that "Bloomberg hates minorities".
 
Last edited:
https://www.gq.com/story/bloomberg-sexism/


This is who the Democratic party is embracing. Yikes yikes yikes.

All this, despite what’s already been reported and alleged for decades about Bloomberg’s behavior. As a recap, here are some examples: Sekiko Sakai Garrison, a former sales representative at Bloomberg LP, alleged in a 1997 lawsuit (one of four separate lawsuits in a two-year period) that when then-CEO Mike Bloomberg found out she was pregnant, he told her, “Kill it!” and “Great! Number 16!”—an apparent reference to the number of pregnant women or women on maternity leave at his company. She also alleged that when Bloomberg saw her engagement ring, he commented, “What is the guy dumb and blind? What the hell is he marrying you for?” and that he once pointed to another female employee and told Garrison, “If you looked like that, I’d do you in a second.” Bloomberg denied having said most of those things, but reportedly left Garrison a voicemail saying that if he did say them, he “didn’t mean it.”

Bloomberg once described his life as a single billionaire bachelor in New York City to a reporter as being a “wet dream.” "I like theater, dining and chasing women," he said. On a radio show in 2003, he said that he would “really want to have” Jennifer Lopez, which he later explained away as wanting to “have dinner” with her. A top aide said Bloomberg frequently remarked “nice tits” upon seeing attractive women. Employees of his in 1990 put together an entire booklet of his some of his more egregious comments, including, "If women wanted to be appreciated for their brains, they'd go to the library instead of to Bloomingdale's,” and, of the computer terminal that made him a billionaire, “It will do everything, including give you [oral sex]. I guess that puts a lot of you girls out of business."
 
Thanx...without realizing it, you proved my point. And you still refuse to acknowledge that his policies accomplished exactly what they were designed to do, and without malice.

What I don't agree with is your assertion that "Bloomberg hates minorities".

By not answering your question, somehow I answered it for you anyway. That is messed up logic.

I don't feel the need to have anyone piss on my shoes just because they don't like what I have to say.

Goodbye sir.
 
By not answering your question, somehow I answered it for you anyway. That is messed up logic.

I don't feel the need to have anyone piss on my shoes just because they don't like what I have to say.

Goodbye sir.

No, the logic is pretty straightforward...if it did not work out the way you had hoped, I'm sorry.
 
He didn't write the article. The facts are the same regardless of who shared them.

Opinions and misleading statements are not facts.

Please do some research on those supposed lawsuits against Bloomberg...and then get back to me.
 
Last edited:
The bernie people are gonna go all out after bloomberg, and the dnc will go all out after bernie. Its gonna be interesting to watch.
 
Back
Top